Is there any real reason to suppose this particular crossing is more likely to have a future accident than many others similar to it? Past performance is not necessarily an indicator for the future as the financial services industry keeps on repeating monotonously under their regulatory requirements. Doesn't the same principle apply to the accident statistics at particular locations?

Ufton crossing is just by the end of some loops - I think the accident report considered that the presence of facing points contributed to the severity of the major accident there, and they probably also mean the crossing is more complicated and costly to renew than most. There has also been at least one other fatality there since the major accident. As it is in a rural are with no buildings nearby a bridge is also relatively easy to provide, so this crossing is likely to be one of the more cost-effective ones for replacement.